How much money was awarded in case 5370324?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $180.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5370324?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5370324?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13071985-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5370324?

Cleaning: $250.00 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $180.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5370324?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5370324?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13071985-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5370324 — Cleanliness

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5370324 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5370324 — net $430.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$180.00	Lawns and Garden work
Net award	$430.00
Bond	$537.25
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$430.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ and landlord’s name and identifying details.

[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $430.00 from the bond, as calculated in the table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $537.25 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $430.00 [The tenant/s]: $107.25

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenants have applied for a refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy.

The landlord filed a cross application seeking compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Both parties provided detailed submissions and evidence, and I confirm I have reviewed everything, even if there is no direct reference to it.

The tenancy commenced in July 2024 and ended on 18 September 2025.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The landlord says that the tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, and they were required to carry out further interior cleaning and exterior garden works. They seek the invoiced amounts of $304.75 for interior cleaning and $232.50 for exterior garden maintenance (being half of the total invoice of $465.00). Pre and post tenancy inspection reports and photographs have been provided in support.

The tenants dispute the landlord’s claims, and says the property was left reasonably clean and tidy and that the landlord’s evidence fails to prove that it was not. They further say, that if the Tribunal finds that it was not left reasonably clean and tidy, the quantum claimed does not accurately reflect the works required to meet the standard of reasonably clean and tidy. Several Tribunal cases and have been referenced, together with suggested cleaning (interior and exterior) rates from alternative local providers.

On review of the evidence, I consider that although some cleaning was obviously carried out at the end of the tenancy, there were additional works required both to the interior and exterior to meet the requisite standard. However, I have reduced the amounts awarded to reflect the evidence. It is difficult to know exactly what was cleaned and for how long, and whether any of the cleaning went beyond the standard in the RTA. I therefore award $250.00 towards the cleaning costs.

I also award $180.00 towards exterior garden and maintenance. The tenants accepted that some garden work was likely required however, the standard required is not the standard at the commencement of the tenancy, and simply what is required to be objectively reasonably clean and tidy.

The amounts ordered are proved.

I have not awarded the fling fee to either party and consider that in the circumstances, these costs should lie where they fall.

The parties sought name suppression and as both parties have had some level of success, this is granted. See section 95A of the RTA. R Harvey-Lane 04 February 2026

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5370324 — net $430.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Cleaning	$250.00	Cleaning
Lawns and Garden work	$180.00	Lawns and Garden work
Net award	$430.00
Bond	$537.25
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$430.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ and landlord’s name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] to pay [The landlord/s] $430.00 from the bond, as calculated in the table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $537.25 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $430.00 [The tenant/s]: $107.25

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants have applied for a refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy.
The landlord filed a cross application seeking compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
Both parties provided detailed submissions and evidence, and I confirm I have reviewed everything, even if there is no direct reference to it.
The tenancy commenced in July 2024 and ended on 18 September 2025.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The landlord says that the tenants did not leave the property reasonably clean and tidy, and they were required to carry out further interior cleaning and exterior garden works. They seek the invoiced amounts of $304.75 for interior cleaning and $232.50 for exterior garden maintenance (being half of the total invoice of $465.00). Pre and post tenancy inspection reports and photographs have been provided in support.
The tenants dispute the landlord’s claims, and says the property was left reasonably clean and tidy and that the landlord’s evidence fails to prove that it was not. They further say, that if the Tribunal finds that it was not left reasonably clean and tidy, the quantum claimed does not accurately reflect the works required to meet the standard of reasonably clean and tidy. Several Tribunal cases and have been referenced, together with suggested cleaning (interior and exterior) rates from alternative local providers.
On review of the evidence, I consider that although some cleaning was obviously carried out at the end of the tenancy, there were additional works required both to the interior and exterior to meet the requisite standard. However, I have reduced the amounts awarded to reflect the evidence. It is difficult to know exactly what was cleaned and for how long, and whether any of the cleaning went beyond the standard in the RTA. I therefore award $250.00 towards the cleaning costs.
I also award $180.00 towards exterior garden and maintenance. The tenants accepted that some garden work was likely required however, the standard required is not the standard at the commencement of the tenancy, and simply what is required to be objectively reasonably clean and tidy.
The amounts ordered are proved.
I have not awarded the fling fee to either party and consider that in the circumstances, these costs should lie where they fall.
The parties sought name suppression and as both parties have had some level of success, this is granted. See section 95A of the RTA. R Harvey-Lane 04 February 2026

Tenancy Tribunal case 5370324 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5370324 — Cleanliness

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions